Photograph by: Ward Perrin
, Vancouver Sun

British Columbia won't support heavy oil pipeline construction without a major overhaul of federal spill regulations and other actions to protect the environment and first nations interests, the provincial government said Monday.

B.C. wants a world-leading, industry-funded response system to deal with both marine and land-based spills, and made it clear that the federal government's system for dealing with spills is outdated and inadequate.

The province announced its position at a jam-packed press conference in Vancouver where Environment Minister Terry Lake and Aboriginal Relations Minister Mary Polak released a 52-page 'technical analysis' of conditions under which B.C. would support heavy oil pipelines such as the Enbridge Northern Gateway project and the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Expansion project.

B.C. set out five primary conditions for supporting pipeline development — such as approval of the Enbridge project by the joint review panel of the National Energy Board, and an increase in B.C.'s share of the billions of dollars in direct revenue the pipeline will generate.

B.C. also wants Ottawa to impose on oil shippers a new levy supporting a spill disaster recovery fund - saying that both government and the public are exposed to financial risk in the event of a major spill because existing spill recovery funds are too small to pay for a major cleanup effort.

For example the maximum payout today from the existing marine spill shipper levy fund is $155 million, plus $137 million in shipper liability insurance, plus $1 billion from an international marine organization fund. By contrast, B.C. notes, cleanup from the Exxon Valdez spill was as much as $7 billion. It's not certain that the full recovery cost of a spill will be borne by the responsible party.

B.C. also called on Northern Gateway pipeline proponent Enbridge to do more than the "legal minimum" amount of consultation with B.C. first nations — none of whom, according to Aboriginal Relations Minister Mary Polak, support the $5.5 billion project.

The province has no statutory authority to compel the changes.

But it bolstered its case by noting that the Auditor-general of Canada in 2010 warned in a report, titled Oil Spills from Ships, that "on the federal side, risk assessments related to spills were incomplete, emergency management plans were out of date and there was no national approach to training, testing plans (exercises) and maintaining equipment."

Lake said the Enbridge project would have "a significant footprint in our province."

B.C. wants Ottawa to establish a working group to develop policies around increased tanker traffic and handling hazardous materials, to eliminate federal red tape that, at present, blocks cooperation between the Coast Guard and province during spill cleanup efforts. B.C. is also calling for better maps of the B.C. coastline and an examination of why Canada's rules for oil tanker travel are more lax than those of the U.S.

"Those are questions outside of the environmental assessment process that are in play at the moment but they are still important questions that need to be answered before we would consider support," Lake said.

"It is impossible to eliminate all risk entirely. So we need to know that, even after we have absolutely minimized the chances, if there was spill, [we would] have the systems and capacity in place to ensure an effective response and remediation."

Todd Nogier, Enbridge spokesman, said the company was reviewing B.C.'s proposals.

"What we would say at this stage is that we welcome this input from the B.C government. We think that this makes for a really good opportunity to talk about specific items and to talk about issues that they see as important with respect to the project," Nogier said.

"This is an opportunity for both sides, for the B.C. government and for Enbridge to come together and work to address some of these outstanding issues and look to address further concerns they might have."

Ian Anderson, president of Kinder Morgan Canada, said he expected the B.C. proposals would "stimulate some conversation among B.C., Alberta, the federal government, industry, as well as pipeline proponents, around things like the fund they're contemplating putting in place for land and terrestrial protection."

"What we've told the B.C. government is that we're more than prepared to play a role in those conversations, and come to the table."

Geraldine Thomas-Flurer, coordinator of the Yinka Dene Alliance, said the implicit message in the government's announcement is that "a spill is going to happen and we need more money through the cleanup process."

"We can't just ignore the fact that Enbridge has a huge record of oil spills and they've proved that they cannot clean up oil," Thomas-Flurer said.

Karen Wristen, executive director of the Living Oceans Society, said the province's proposed spill recovery plans might suit a spill of conventional crude oil "but that's not what we're transporting here." "This is [diluted bitumen] and it behaves completely differently from conventional crude oil when it hits water. It goes to the bottom. Part of it becomes an extremely toxic cloud that prevents anybody getting near any portion of it that might remain floating. It's just not the same product and when I hear people resort to phrases like world class oil spill response technology I just want to scream," Wristen said.

Alberta Premier Allison Redford suggested B.C.'s proposals were unnecessary, declaring herself satisfied that the public's interests would be satisfied by the National Energy Board's project hearing — and by the Enbridge announcement last week that it plans to spend an additional $500 million on spill prevention equipment for Northern Gateway.

"Every Canadian, no matter what province they call home, expects that energy development is done with a high degree of environmental safeguards," Redford stated in a news release. "This is why a rigorous environmental review is underway by the National Energy Board. It is why the company involved has committed an additional $500 million for increased monitoring and safety measures. These efforts, combined with the fact that pipelines are still by far the safest means by which to transport oil, significantly mitigate the environmental risk and weaken the B.C. government's argument for compensation based on potential risk."

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.